Regional Beach Sand Project III (RBSPIII)
Phase I - Preliminary Planning Activities
Scope of Work
INTRODUCTION:
SANDAG is the Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) for the San Diego region and plays a key role in the regional coordination of a variety of projects. The San Diego region has 19 jurisdictions, 10 of which are located in the coastal zone and collectively manage approximately 70 miles of coastline which can be accessed via transit, highways, roadways, and bicycle and pedestrian facilities. A number of these facilities are at risk from the impacts of rising seas, high tides, and strong storms. As such, access to beaches, residences, and public facilities may be impacted. This would be particularly impactful to disadvantaged populations living in the cities of Oceanside, Carlsbad, City of San Diego, National City, Chula Vista, and Imperial Beach which have populations that fall in the 70-100 percentile of the demographic index (source:
EJSCREEN).
SANDAG proposes to conduct a feasibility study for a regional beach sand nourishment project which would use information from SANDAG’s Round 1 SB 1 Caltrans Adaptation Planning Grant effort to identify transportation facilities that will be impacted by sea-level rise and may benefit from beach nourishment. Implementation of a regional beach sand project would involve dredging beach quality sand from offshore borrow sites and placing it on highly eroded beaches in the San Diego region. Beach nourishment is being considered as a sea-level rise adaptation strategy by a number of cities in the San Diego region who have updated their Local Coastal Programs to align with the California Coastal Commission’s Guidance on sea-level rise. Wide beaches can help protect coastal communities and coastal transportation facilities by acting as a buffer to alleviate some of the impacts from sea-level rise, strong storm events, and high tides.
SANDAG has previously completed two regional beach sand nourishment projects in 2001 and 2012 (RBSP I and RBSP II, respectively), adding approximately 3.5 million cubic yards of sand to the region's local beaches. In addition, SANDAG has an established regional forum (the Shoreline Preservation Working Group) where elected officials are engaged in regional adaptation projects, such as beach nourishment.
SANDAG will coordinate closely with city staff, city council members who serve on SANDAG’s Shoreline Preservation Working Group (SPWG), and other technical advisors on this project.
Work efforts from this project will be summarized in two final deliverables: the Feasibility Study and the Offshore Borrow Site Survey Plan.
RESPONSIBLE PARTIES
SANDAG will require the assistance of a consulting team to complete this work. SANDAG has not yet selected which firm will provide this assistance but will utilize the agency’s list of on-call consultants, selected through the established procurement procedures, to find the appropriate firm(s) to perform this work. Generally, SANDAG will be responsible for overall project management and administration and will play a role in coordinating with local jurisdictions as well as drafting and editing the feasibility study. The consultant will be responsible for the majority of other tasks including the review of existing monitoring data, completing the Offshore Borrow Site Survey Plan, completing the Economic Analysis, and finalizing the Feasibility Study. $WWDFKPHQW
OVERALL PROJECT OBJECTIVES:
x Identify beach erosion areas in the San Diego region that may impact coastal transportation infrastructure through review of existing data and coordination with coastal jurisdiction staff.
x Evaluate the economic costs and benefits of implementing a regional beach nourishment project and several alternatives to that project that may include one pilot sand retention strategy.
x Complete a Feasibility Study for a future regional beach nourishment project and alternatives.
x Identify lessons learned from the past two regional beach sand projects administered by SANDAG and other southern California beach nourishments efforts and identify how to expedite project delivery and minimize project costs compared to prior efforts. x Create a plan for surveying offshore sand borrow sites to ensure adequate quantities of sand are available to nourish the San Diego region’s beaches.
1. Task 1: Project Management and Administration
SANDAG will hold a kick-off meeting with the consultants to review the procedures and project expectations, including invoicing, quarterly reporting, scope of work, timeline, communication protocols, and other relevant project information. A meeting summary shall be documented by the Consultant. SANDAG will coordinate with the consultants through regular communication (including in-person meetings and/or conference calls) to ensure project remains on time and within budget. Meeting notes shall be documented by the Consultant. The consultant shall invoice SANDAG and provide a brief summary of work efforts on a monthly basis. Time spent preparing invoices shall be included in Consultant’s overhead cost. SANDAG shall not pay for time spent preparing billing for SANDAG.
Task 1 Deliverables
x Meeting Notes and Summaries
x Subcontractor Agreements
x Quarterly Progress Reports
Task 1 Assumptions
x 1 in person kickoff meeting attended by AECOM (3 staff), M&N (1 staff), CFC (1 staff), Merkel (1 staff), Phil King
x 1 field site visit attended by AECOM (2 staff), M&N (1 staff), Merkel (1 staff), Phil King on same day as kick off (to maximize travel efficiency). x 8 meetings (virtual and in person) attended by AECOM with associated agenda/meeting notes/action items
2. Task 2: Economic Analysis
Using actual costs from RBSP II, the consultant shall prepare an economic analysis that includes the following components: preliminary cost estimates of a range of project alternatives that may include one pilot sand retention strategy, a benefit/cost analysis of the project alternatives, and a discussion of economic impacts. This economic analysis shall be summarized in the feasibility study and included as an appendix to the final document. The consultant shall evaluate the Benefit Cost Analysis (BCA) prepared by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers for the Encinitas-Solana Beach Coastal Storm Damage Reduction Project and the economic analysis conducted for the 2007 Feasibility Study (prepared for RBSP II) in order to provide a methodology for the analysis for approval by SANDAG. The BCA should be developed to allow federal agencies to evaluate the benefit to cost ratio of the project and various subsegments of the project (by littoral cell or jurisdiction).
The methodology approach below will be finalized as a deliverable prior to undertaking the analysis. The quantitative analysis is anticipated to address two elements 1) “non-market value” of recreational benefits of RBSP III, which will be incorporated into a benefit-cost analysis and) 2) an estimate of the economic impacts—additional spending, jobs, and local taxes generated by RBSP III.
x Data Collection: Consultant will collect the following data: (a) daily attendance data at all State and local beaches where available (most); (b) data from San Diego County assessor’s office which includes geospatial data, currently assessed (property tax) value; (c) data from local governments on the value of their property, which is not assessed for property tax purposes; (d) data on beach width/area before and after nourishment and over the 5-10 year life of the project as pulled from past shoreline monitoring; (e) any available data on beach spending patterns; (e) data on the likely costs of RBSP III including compliance costs. x Data Analysis: The following analyses will be performed with the data collected:
Estimates of local property value: The analysis will use the best available public data (e.g., Zillow) to estimate the value of local property. Analysis of non-market benefits of nourishment: The analysis of beach value incorporates daily attendance and capacity constraints. Since fill sites do not always correspond with beach jurisdictions (e.g., Oceanside), adjustments to attendance at these sites will be made.
Analysis of economic impacts: The additional recreation and tourism will generate additional spending and taxes. The analysis will estimate: (i) increases in local spending; (ii) increases in local taxes, in particular sales and transient occupancy taxes; (iii) indirect and induced impacts as well as job creation, applying IMPLAN or similar software. x The benefits of storm damage reduction will not be addressed quantitatively because the USACE modeling requirements are extensive and not within the budget parameters. The team will identify locations that are potentially vulnerable to flooding/storm damage (from existing Cosmos data, team knowledge and possibly land managers/city staff). Then qualitatively address how the project may benefit/reduce potential damage. x Benefit/Cost Analysis: Consultant will conduct a benefit/cost analysis over the life of the project, using a discount rate agreed to by SANDAG, but consistent with federal assumptions (likely NOAA and not USACE). This analysis will examine the “net benefits”— whether the benefits exceed the cost, including a benefit/cost ratio where necessary. As with RSBP II, this analysis will be broken down by individual fill receiver sites. The benefits and costs will also be delineated into recreational (non-market) benefits and economic and tax impacts. Possible benefits to private and public property from storm damage reduction as linked to potentially vulnerable locations will be noted. The study will generate a BCA but not using the exact same methods/inputs as the standard USACE approach There is also interest in considering potential sand nourishment projects along the shoreline of San Diego Bay. For purposes of this analysis, we assume one existing public beach location in the Bay may be identified from the Feasibility Study. The economic analysis will qualitatively describe net benefits, The communities that could benefit (considering proximity and observations) will be noted.
The consultant should assume three rounds of comments in the preparation of the Draft Economic Analysis as follows, comments by SANDAG on the draft, comments from the members of the Shoreline Preservation Working Group on the draft, and comments from the public.
Task 2 Deliverables
x Finalized Methodology Approach for the Economic Analysis x Draft Economic Analysis Technical Appendix
x Final Economic Analysis Technical Appendix
Task 2 Assumptions
x Technical Appendix >30 pages, ~ 10 power point slides for SPWG meeting x Budget assumes a set of up to 12 fill site envelopes derived from RBSP I and II, with alternative variations from retention features or other refinements at up to 6 sites, for no more 18 alternatives/configurations. If additional sites or program configurations are developed, the economic analysis and assumptions may be revisited for additional scope and fee.
3. Task 3: Regional Beach Sand Replenishment Project (RBSP III) Feasibility Study
Using information obtained from Tasks 2, the consultant shall draft a feasibility study for a future regional beach sand project (RBSPIII). The 2007 Feasibility Study that was prepared for RBSP II will be used as a template and the updated Feasibility Study shall address the same major topics including, but not limited to: a statement of the problem, a description of existing site conditions, consideration of project alternatives and ways to extend the life between beach nourishment cycles, methods to reduce costs and leverage other efforts in southern California, and economic considerations. The Feasibility Study shall also include an explanation of how beach nourishment can be used to protect coastal critical infrastructure in the region from sea level rise, examples from other regions should be provided. The Feasibility Study shall identify the various permits and approvals that would be needed for the implementation of this project.
As part of the Feasibility Study, or a separate report, the consultant shall address the lessons learned from prior RBSP I and II, and opportunities to expedite project delivery and reduce costs. The consultant shall specifically address the following:
1. Ways to streamline environmental clearance under CEQA/NEPA (e.g., use of Mitigated Negative Declarations and focused EIRs, Supplementing EIR/EIS prepared for Encinitas-Solana Beach Coastal Storm Damage Reduction Project, development and tiering of Program EIR, etc.), and regulatory permits;
2. Ways to leverage opportunities arising from the Encinitas-Solana Beach Coastal Storm Damage Reduction Project and other southern California beach nourishment or sand bypass projects;
3. Opportunities to reduce cost mobilization of dredging (e.g., utilization of dredge under contract by U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, shared purchase of a hopper dredge for southern California nourishment efforts, etc.);
4. Analysis of issues that led to the damages resulting from the sand placement in Imperial Beach during RBSP II and ways to avoid damages in the future; and
5. Opportunities to reduce post-construction monitoring based upon past efforts.
The Feasibility Study shall also address the needs of the sand nourishment, if any, of jurisdictions fronting the San Diego Bay (e.g., Coronado's Grand Caribe Isle located in the Coronado Cays).
Consultant has developed one possible Annotated Table of Contents (provided below) with approach/scope of work described in more detail in the following text.
Site condition patterns are relatively similar over the past few decades, so will be described based on the two primary sources (2007 Feasibility Study and 2009 Coastal Sediment Management Plan) plus monitoring data collected annually as shared with the SPWG.
Consultant will also consolidate information on other related projects (ongoing, planned, potential) which will be key to considering creative regional approaches to routine beach nourishment. Chapter 3 will address items 1-5 noted above. Regarding CEQA/NEPA and Permitting, the study will disclose various document types and possible permits relative to the various alternatives considered. The potential ocean dredging projects and beach nourishment efforts in Section 2.6 will be explored in terms of leveraging opportunities based on timing and ability to share equipment. Documenting lessons learned from RBSP II in Imperial Beach will provide for best practices that can be applied elsewhere. Regarding post-construction monitoring, Consultant will develop a list of possible of monitoring elements for various phases of RBSP III and conduct an analysis as to the likelihood that each could be eliminated or reduced based on lessons learned from RBSP I, RBSP II, San Elijo and others.
Consultant team will focus their collective knowledge and expertise in working session(s) to explore the broad suite of alternatives and document the outcome in Chapter 4. The list above is intended as preliminary ideas and not complete.
The Feasibility Study will address the economic issue via the BCA results (which are useful for grant funding opportunities) and exploration of regional funding options. The study will summarize the project configuration used to calculate the BCA. There is a world of project variations given the number of potential sites, amount of material that could be placed per site, location of retention (if included), location of borrow site(s), etc. Based on discussions with SANDAG, existing designs plus monitoring data from RBSP I and II, Consultant team will identify a prototype project for the BCA. Chapter 5 will describe that prototype project and the resulting modelled BCA (by site and/or by littoral cell). The economic study will be an appendix.
The feasibility study will also explore finance options available to city and county governments to raise revenues to pay for future nourishments. This study will examine options such as special property tax districts like Geologic Hazard Abatement District (GHAD) or Community Finance Districts, increases in transient occupancy taxes (TOTs), or reducing restrictions on short-term (STRs) to generate sales tax increases. The study will note where else in California these revenue options have been, or are, under consideration. Finally, the study will note possible approaches to reduce high-cost items, like the dredge, that could substantially lessen the overall price-tag.
A meeting shall be scheduled with interested stakeholders (city staff, members of the SPWG, members of the public, etc.) to review the draft feasibility study and solicit feedback. SANDAG will likely use a scheduled SPWG meeting as the forum for this discussion. Comments from stakeholders may also be submitted in writing and revisions to the feasibility study shall be made as needed. The consultant shall incorporate comments from SANDAG staff and interested stakeholders into a final version of the feasibility study.
Task 3 Deliverables
x Draft Feasibility Study
x Host meetings to discuss draft Feasibility Study
x Finalize Feasibility Study
Task 3 Assumptions
x Up to 8 alternatives addressed in Chapter 4.0, not all at equal level of detail. x Present draft finding at SPWG meeting in person (AECOM, M&N) and virtual (Merkel, CFC, King).
4. Task 4: Off-Shore Borrow Site
The consultant shall conduct a literature review of offshore investigations completed for Regional Beach Sand Projects I and II (RBSP I and RBSP II) to identify any additional candidate borrow sites in the northern portion of San Diego County that could be utilized to implement a future beach nourishment project. The consultant shall prepare a plan and scope of work to conduct an investigation of a minimum of three offshore borrow sites to determine the outer boundaries of the two offshore borrow sites used for RBSP II (MB-1 and SO-5) and at least one new borrow site in the northern portion of San Diego County. Once completed, these surveys will help to estimate the quantity of sand available for beach nourishment on the San Diego coastline.
Consultant’s approach to this task leverages their experience from two prior RBSP efforts and more recent research. Consultant will update ArcGIS model with available coastal, geophysical and geologic and geoarchaeology literature post RBSP II to focus on North County and MB-1.
We recommend the offshore borrow investigations for RBSP III be planned similar to the RBSP II approach carried out at that time. The investigation plan will provide the exploration methodology starting with permitting and agency coordination needs for the eventual offshore field work. No field work will be performed at this stage.
Task 4 Deliverable
x Perform Off-Shore Borrow Site existing data review
x Prepare Off-Shore Borrow Site Plan and Scope of Work for Three Sites
5. Optional Task 5: San Clemente Nourishment Planning
This is an optional task, so no work will be performed without prior authorization from the City of San Clemente via entering into a MOU with SANDAG for Phase I – Preliminary Planning Activities. If exercised, Tasks 1-4 will be expanded upon to cover possible beach nourishment for the City of San Clemente. The consultant shall review the San Clemente component of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineer Storm Damage Reduction Project and what additional areas need beach nourishment in the City of San Clemente. Additional areas will be included in the economic analysis BCA and included in the Feasibility Analysis. The consultant shall evaluate one additional offshore borrow site located in the Northern extent of the Oceanside Littoral cell in addition those identified in Task 4 for possible beach sand nourishment in San Clemente.
Consultant would revise the table of contents for the Feasibility Study to include information for San Clemente. For example, Site Conditions would address Wave Climate (and other topics in Chapter 2) in the San Diego region as a subsection and there would be a new subsection for the San Clemente Wave Climate. Other Related Projects (Section 2.6) would be expanded into Orange County. While the Lessons Learned (Chapter 3.0) would remain largely focused on San Diego, the Recommendations for Efficiencies could consider this new opportunity. If San Clemente were formally a part of RBSP III, then “possible” efficiencies in shared dredge would become more certain. Alternatively, the approach to CEQA streamlining may become more complex as decisions would need to be made regarding lead agency or lead agencies. The universe of alternatives would expand so Section 4 would expand as well. For costing purposes, we assume up to two receiver sites could be identified (one each north and south of the USACE site).
Once defined, the project envelopes for the economic analysis would be evaluated to generate BCA. The same methodology would be applied, but new data would need to be collected in Orange County for property value and attendance.
For the Offshore Borrow Site Study, the team would review offshore investigations for potential sites identified by USACE and published studies. Candidate borrow sites are anticipated to include current borrow sites identified by USACE including Oceanside and other potential sites along Camp Pendleton and Orange County. Consultant will develop a work plan for a future offshore investigation. The work plan objectives would involve confirming known sites, as needed, or further investigating beach material suitability at one new potential borrow site (where only limited investigations have been performed historically).
The program management approach would remain as proposed but there would be additional time required to facilitate coordination and communication with a broader group. A second kick- off meeting would be scheduled with San Clemente and SANDAG staff, with a site visit that same day. Attendees in person will include team members from AECOM, M&N, and Dr. King with others virtual. The complexity and cost of adding the San Clemente location is minimized if the option is exercised very soon after the Feasibility Study project is kicked off, so for costing purposes we assume the authorization is received within a month of project initiation.
Task 5 Deliverable
x Expanded Economic Analysis and Feasibility Study
x Perform Off-Shore Borrow Site existing data review
x Prepare Off-Shore Borrow Site Plan and Scope of Work for fourth area Task 5 Assumptions
x Authorization to proceed received one month after NTP for RBSP III San Diego region.
The longer between initiation of the San Diego region project and adding San Clemente, the less efficient and there may be need for additional funding. x 1 field site visit attended by AECOM (2 staff), M&N (1 staff), and Phil King: CFC (1 staff) and Merkel (1 staff) virtual kick off.
x No more than 2 alternative receiver sites added to Chapter 4.0 of the Feasibility Study (excluding the site under consideration by USACE).
Exhibit B – Budget Schedule
Regional Beach Sand Project III (RBSPIII) Preliminary Planning Activities Task Name Description State Date End Date
1 Project Management and Administration SANDAG to monitor Project Management and Administration NTP 15 months from NTP 2 Economic Analysis Subconsultant to prepare an updated Economic Analysis NTP 12 months from NTP 3 Regional Beach Sand Replenishment Project (RBSP III) Feasibility Study Draft RBSP III Feasibility Study, Review, and Finalize NTP 14 months from NTP 4 Off-shore Borrow Site Plan
Consultant will prepare an Offshore Borrow Site Plan and Scope of Work for Three Sites NTP 15 months from NTP
5 Optional Task: City of San Clemente Nourishment Planning Consultant will expand upon the Feasibility Study, Economic Analysis, and Offshore Borrow Site Plan to include the City of San Clemente TBD Upon
SANDAG
authorization
TBD Upon
SANDAG
authorization